The 2012 Pro in these tests is not the base model but the highest-end model with upgraded CPU. However, the Haswell processors in the 2013 version are enough of an improvement that they close the gap a bit between the disparate clock speeds.

In Cinebench, the retina MacBook Pro scarcely edges out the 2013 Core i7 MacBook Air we tested in multi-core performance, and it's actually bested by the MacBook Air in single core. In Cinebench’s fps marks, the retina MacBook Pro manages to outperform its 2012 predecessor, though it breaks about even with the MacBook Air in terms of numbers.

Likewise, the retina MacBook Pro remains competitive with the other i7 computers we tested in Geekbench’s multi-core tests while falling behind in single-core ones.

The only benchmarks where the retina MacBook Pro manages to smoke this MacBook Air are in the Unigine Heaven and Valley tests. It’s a small victory, but the Pro manages a scant few frames per second more than the Air, finally displaying its graphics-processing superiority.

Ultimately I’m surprised (but shouldn’t be) to see so much performance parity here between a pro-level computer and an ultra-portable, though the two computers are the same price ($1549 for the Air, and $1699 for the Pro). I feel ever so slightly like I’ve been had, paying over $100 more for an extra half-pound of nothing.

From a short-term performance standpoint, stepping from a 13-inch Air to a 13-inch Pro at the same price point is marginal at best, as long as Intel’s turbo mode can kick in to give the Air small but significant boosts. Where the Pro will shine is in longer periods of high activity, like rendering video or exporting a batch of photos. At that point, the Iris GPU’s superiority will come into play, and the Pro will exhibit its differences.

Speaking in year-to-year improvements, the Iris graphics, though still integrated, are a substantial improvement over the Intel HD series the 13-inch MacBook Pros were stuck with last year.

All I know is, when I tried to play a YouTube video full-screen at 1080p, the MacBook Air began giving me lip in the form of periodic stutters. This is the same type of problem I originally moved to the Pro line to escape, and in my unfortunately entitled way, I can’t believe this kind of thing is still happening in a practically new computer.

Battery life

Between the new Haswell processor and the power management tweaks in OS X Mavericks, the retina MacBook Pro is purported to get a very long battery life for a pro-level machine. Apple quotes it at nine hours of wireless Web or video playback from a 6591mAh battery.

The idle power management skills showed off as much as possible during our Web-browsing test. With brightness at 50 percent and the backlight disabled, the retina MacBook Pro was able to get 15 hours and 33 minutes from the full battery. This usage case won’t apply unless you are giving your retina MacBook Pro the most modest of tasks, like working in a text editor with utilities turned off or very slow-paced browsing.

When we cranked up the testing conditions, the battery life dropped like a stone. When we performed the same browsing test with the brightness at 100 percent and an MP3 looping in the background at 50 percent volume, we scored only six hours and 40 minutes. This is quite a spread in performance, but in my normal moderate-to-heavy, on-and-off daily workflow, I found that getting about eight to nine hours from the battery was a realistic expectation. I tend to keep the brightness low, but I run an IM client, Tweetdeck, and (generally speaking) between 10 and a billion tabs in Chrome. There's also some occasional photo editing and exporting with Lightroom.

The Air got 16 hours and six minutes on the first browser-only test. For two computers occupying pretty different price brackets, the difference in battery life is almost negligible. However, you could definitely get a full workday out of the MacBook Air, while the MacBook Pro may leave you stranded and computer-less for the last few hours if your workload gets too intense.

Enlarge/ The screens of the two computers are similar in color quality, though the MacBook Air's is a little faded at higher brightness levels.

The rise of the Pro

Even for buyers who are deciding between the base high-end model of the MacBook Air and the base lowest-end MacBook Pro, the Pro remains a compelling choice despite its rather large price difference. A computer without a retina screen like the MacBook Air is just not as forward-looking and future-proof, not to mention the rest of the performance improvements. The Pro also has a significant edge in sustained graphics-processing tasks.

When the configurations match up in price, the MacBook Air is difficult to justify when the Pro is in the picture. That is, unless you happen to be the type of user for whom extreme portability and a few extra hours on top of an already-long battery life trump performance. For my uses, the value proposition of the Pro makes it the better buy.

Casey Johnston
Casey Johnston is the former Culture Editor at Ars Technica, and now does the occasional freelance story. She graduated from Columbia University with a degree in Applied Physics. Twitter@caseyjohnston